W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > March 2009

RE: [questionnaire] Addendum to Mobile Web Best Practices ready for publication?

From: Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich <k.scheppe@telekom.de>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 09:34:17 +0100
Message-ID: <FF6AD6C11AA23F4F9866E9A3C57602ED50375A@QEO00217.de.t-online.corp>
To: <achuter@technosite.es>, "Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group WG" <public-bpwg@w3.org>
Hi Alan,

Thank for you input.  That great stuff.
I will put my responses in the text and hope to see some other feedback
on Alan's points....

-- Kai

 
+Generally

* Mark up the table of contents as a real UL list (without the BR line
breaks).

-- sure.  Thought this was already the case, but haven't looked in a
while.


* The section for each BP "Relevant device properties" needs some
explanation. I understand that this means properties that can be
detected on the server. This is covered in the BP document under "3.5
Establishing Context" [4].

-- Dom had suggested putting this in and I think his intention was
different.
   Dom?


* I think that references should be marked in the text
[REFERENCE_HANDLE] with a link to the  section at the end of the page.

-- Yes. Also, as Francois pointed out the Ref section needs to be
formatted as well.


+1.1 Purpose

* "Mobile Web Best Practices contains sections against each best
practice" might be better written as "Each of the Mobile Web Best
Practices contains a section called "What to Test".

* The preceding isn't really about the purpose of the document, but I
can't see where else it fits in.

-- I think this came from Jo, so I would like to see what he thinks.
   Also, we don't want to say "test".
   Jo?


* Missing space in "evaluationsin".

-- Ok


+1.2 Relationship to mobileOK Basic Tests

* The second paragraph ("Many of the tests described in mobileOK Basic
Tests are...") is useful, and is an addendum to MWBP, but I don't think
it belongs in this section as many of the tests described in this
document are not useful when determining suitability of content for use
on more advanced devices either. It's more a general comment on MWBP as
a whole.

-- Group feedback?

* "completes the set of Best Practices" perhaps better as "completes the
set of tests for the Best Practices"

-- Here too, shouldn't use "test".
   Group feedback to Alan's point?


+2.1 Evaluation Scope

It might be useful to cite the Web content Accessibility Guidelines (now
a W3C Recommendation), the section about conformance that has two
clauses "Full pages" and "Complete processes." These are not specific to
accessibility and apply equally well to MWBP. So we should mention them
I think. In fact, just below it the item "A concise description of the
Web pages" is also relevant.

-- Since we are not asking for conformance, this might be a bit too
strong.
   Group feedback?


+3.4 Background Image readability

The Example should perhaps be an image (remembering
STYLE_SHEETS_SUPPORT). Without CSS it is black on white.

The WCAG 2.0 Techniques [2] give a list of tools to check this,
including one developed especially for WCAG 2.0.  I think that the
Ishihara Test for Color Blindness isn't very useful as it consists of
very specific examples. If people aren't using exactly those colours it
won't help them.

WCAG success criterion 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) [3] gives a definition,
and exceptions to this which might be worth mentioning.

-- I disagree on using a picture as this is a test for contrast.  White
on black is a good way to demonstrate this.
   I am not aware of the Ishihara Test for Color Blindness being limited
to colors, but rather to contrast levels of two adjascent colors.
   Either way it demonstrate very well what this point is about.
   However we could certainly refer to more tools to check this issue.



+3.5 Balance

Under "Relevant device properties: Support for non-linear navigation
across links" I didn't understand this until I read the rest of the
section. Perhaps "non-sequential" or "skipping/jumping links" might be
clearer.

-- Ok, I'll look at it, to make it clearer.



[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#conformance-reqs
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20081211/G18
[3]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#visual-audio-contrast-con
trast
[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/#d0e437
Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 08:35:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:43:00 UTC